By Joseph M. Ricco IV
Wisconsin football cornerback Nyzier Fourqurean has sued the NCAA after being denied an extra year of eligibility, arguing that his two seasons at Division II Grand Valley State should not count against his eligibility clock. The lawsuit claims the NCAA’s decision unfairly limits his ability to compete and earn Name, Image, and Likeness (NIL) compensation. A federal judge granted him a preliminary injunction, allowing him to continue playing while the case unfolds. Given the timing of the ruling, this decision will likely allow him to remain eligible for the 2025 football season. Meanwhile, a similar challenge by former Stonehill College and University of Maryland baseball player Trey Ciulla-Hall was ruled in the NCAA’s favor, uncovering a potential divide in how courts are handling eligibility disputes. This article explores Fourqurean’s lawsuit, the legal arguments at play, and insight from sports law expert Dr. Jodie Balsam on what these rulings mean now and in the future for NCAA regulations.
Fourqurean’s Case
Nyzier Fourqurean’s legal challenge centers on the NCAA’s decision to count his two seasons at Grand Valley State against his five-year eligibility clock, leaving him without another year to compete. His lawsuit, led by attorneys Jason R. Oakes and Robert M. Barnes, argues that this ruling is unfair, particularly because his 2021 season was impacted by the death of his father, which limited his ability to train and prepare. His legal team contends that the NCAA’s refusal to grant him an additional year restricts his ability to maximize NIL opportunities and develop his professional prospects. The case follows a broader trend of athletes challenging NCAA eligibility rules, particularly as they relate to transfer restrictions and economic opportunities.
After the NCAA denied his waiver request, Fourqurean sought relief in federal court, where he was granted a preliminary injunction allowing him to continue playing while the case is litigated. The court ruled that the NCAA’s eligibility restrictions may violate federal antitrust laws by limiting an athlete’s ability to profit from their athletic career. Additionally, the judge determined that Fourqurean would suffer irreparable harm if he was forced to sit out the 2025 season, making immediate relief necessary. With the injunction in place, he is expected to remain eligible next season, but the final outcome of the case could have lasting implications.
Conflicting Rulings
Fourqurean’s case is not the first legal challenge to the NCAA’s five-year rule, but it stands in contrast to the ruling in Trey Ciulla-Hall’s case. The former Stonehill College and University of Maryland baseball player made a similar argument, claiming his eligibility clock should not count a past season due to his mother’s illness and the impact on his playing time. Like Fourqurean, he also cited lost NIL opportunities, but a federal judge in Massachusetts denied his request, ruling that his ineligibility did not create a broader antitrust issue. In contrast, the judge in Fourqurean’s case found that the NCAA’s decision could violate antitrust law and that missing a season would cause irreparable harm. The opposite outcomes demonstrate the inconsistency in how courts are handling eligibility disputes, leaving the NCAA’s five-year rule open to further legal challenges.
Expert Insight: Dr. Jodi Balsam
Dr. Jodi Balsam, a nationally recognized expert in sports law, is a professor at Brooklyn Law School and New York University School of Law. She co-authors Weiler Sports and the Law, one of the leading casebooks in the field, and has extensive experience analyzing the legal complexities surrounding the NCAA. In discussing Fourqurean’s case, she emphasized that this ruling illustrates a larger issue within college athletics, where no NCAA bylaw is fully protected from legal challenges.
“This decision illustrates that there is no NCAA bylaw or rule insulated from antitrust challenge,” Balsam said. “Even if a rule could survive a broad legal challenge, it is unlikely to withstand scrutiny when applied to a particular athlete in the NIL era, where eligibility restrictions have economic consequences.” She noted that the antitrust framework courts currently apply to these cases focuses on whether NCAA rules unfairly restrain trade in the college athlete labor market. While the NCAA has historically defended its rules under the premise of maintaining amateurism, Balsam argued that “to the extent that the amateurism principle has been declared dead, this court has buried it.”
The contrast between Fourqurean’s case and Ciulla-Hall’s ruling highlights the growing legal uncertainty surrounding NCAA eligibility disputes. “Two courts ruled in opposite directions on essentially the same issue,” Balsam said. “If this continues, the NCAA’s rulebook will become unworkable, forcing a complete restructuring of how college sports are regulated.” She explained that while the NCAA has had some success defending its policies in court, the mounting legal challenges indicate that its current system may not survive much longer.
Conclusion
The rulings in Nyzier Fourqurean’s and Trey Ciulla-Hall’s cases show just how uncertain the legal landscape around NCAA eligibility has become. One judge saw a clear antitrust issue, while another upheld the NCAA’s authority, despite the similarities in their arguments. With Fourqurean now set to play in 2025 and more athletes challenging eligibility rules, the NCAA is facing increasing pressure to create a more consistent and legally sound system. Whether the organization makes changes on its own or is forced to adapt through the courts, it is clear that the fight over eligibility is far from over.
Joseph Ricco is a junior at the University of Texas at Austin studying sport management and government. He has experience in recruiting operations with Texas Football, training camp operations with the Kansas City Chiefs, and football data analytics with Pro Football Focus. He has also published work on sports law topics, including salary cap, NIL, and CBAs. Joseph plans to attend law school and pursue a career in football operations, player personnel, or administration.
